Asad Mirza
The ceasefire in Lebanon apart from giving respite to the beleaguered Lebanese, will also be a litmus test for the Hezbollah on whether it can continue to flourish as a political and militant outfit in Lebanon or not.
It would not be wrong to say that the whole of the world and the Middle East and in particular Lebanon took a cautious sigh of relief as the fragile ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel, was announced last week.
The main concern however was whether this ceasefire could hold?, as claims and counter claims by attacks and incursions by both the parties were reported in the first twenty-four hours. But precariously so far, the ceasefire has been held by both the parties.
While fighting may be over, or at least paused, attention now shifts to another challenge facing Lebanon and Hezbollah: internal reckoning. In addition, what ace does Iran has, as it ordered its proxy to agree to a ceasefire in Lebanon. But the larger question is whether Hezbollah will be able to survive this ceasefire as a political and militant group in Lebanon or not.
While some segments of the Lebanese population and Hezbollah’s supporters, see the ceasefire as a victory for the party, others have decried the bloodshed and destruction caused by a conflict they did not back.
Hezbollah opened a limited battlefront against Israel on 8 October 2023 in support of Hamas and Palestinians under attack in the Gaza Strip. The conflict started last year after Hezbollah began firing rockets into northern Israel following Hamas’s October 7 attack, before Israel launched a full-scale invasion in September.
Imad Salamey, a Middle Eastern politics expert at the Lebanese American University, told UK-based website Middle East Eye that “Hezbollah’s claim of victory holds little weight outside its core constituency. The war was not widely popular among the Lebanese people, many of whom are more focused on the devastating economic losses inflicted during the conflict.”
For more than a year, the conflict was mostly limited to clashes in the border areas between Lebanon and Israel. However, the picture changes in September, when Israel exploded thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah members before launching a widespread bombing campaign across the country followed by a ground invasion. More than 3,900 people in Lebanon were killed and over a million displaced.
While Lebanese have largely acted in solidarity with those displaced and killed by Israel, and stood by their compatriots in the face of Israeli forces, how the conflict has shifted domestic political dynamics may determine Lebanon’s fate for years to come.
In fact, the presence of Hezbollah and its militant arm has been a point of contention for decades in Lebanese politics. Salamey says that Hezbollah is “likely concerned about growing opposition within Lebanon, which could create two polarised camps, one supporting Hezbollah and the other pushing for disarmament”.
“To suppress dissent and maintain control, Hezbollah may feel compelled to take domestic actions, including using its influence to neutralise political opponents or deter their activities through various actions,” he added.
In contrast, Qassim Qassir, an analyst close to Hezbollah, told MEE that the group remains “reassured” about its internal political position in Lebanon. The group is currently reviewing its latest actions and will “define its future vision and is reassured that the results of the battle were in its favour”, according to Qassir.
Qassir said further that these people have so far “failed” to take advantage of the war and its consequences to score political points against Hezbollah.
The US-brokered ceasefire agreement is intended to erode Hezbollah’s ability to operate freely in its bastion of southern Lebanon, barring the group from having a military presence south of the Litani River. Those close to Hezbollah say it is unclear whether that means its fighters — many of whom are residents of villages and towns in the south — would be able to return.
Hezbollah’s ability to continue firing heavier projectile barrages deeper into Israel, including anti-tank missiles and drones, shows it still possesses potent military capabilities. People close to the group also point to its ability to prevent Israel from advancing deep into Lebanon, killing about 50 Israeli soldiers, as proof of its capability.
Unlike in 2006, when Hezbollah was able to ignore a similar deal that ended a war that year, the group will now have to show that it is actively complying with the terms of the ceasefire. The weak Lebanese state — already worn out by a yearlong conflict and festering economic crisis — could pay the price if it does not.
That may open the door to opponents demanding the dismantling of Hezbollah, which remains a powerful representative of the country’s Shias, one of its largest communities, with vast reach into the levers of the state.
Hezbollah’s victory narrative will be embraced for now by its constituency, many of whom will be relieved to be able to start going back home. But the message will be undermined without massive reconstruction, compensation, and resumption of social welfare in the face of widespread destruction and displacement.
The World Bank estimates the war has caused $8.5 billion in damage and economic losses – more than one-third of Lebanon’s GDP. Hezbollah insists that money for reconstruction will not be an issue, but given that its own main backer Iran has its own economic woes and Hezbollah’s unpopularity with other Middle Eastern governments, it is unclear who may contribute funds for reconstruction, and with what conditions.
As powerful a representative as Hezbollah remains for Lebanon’s Shia, its domestic political rivals are always looking for an opportunity to exploit claims that the group brings nothing but trouble to the country as a whole.
These rivals include Christian leaders who are keen to shift the levers of power in Lebanon’s sectarian power-sharing system in their favour. The danger as in Lebanon’s past that such challenges to power end up in sectarian violence is a spectre the country has long lived with.
Janna Kadri and Tala Alayli, in their piece on the website Al Mayadeen opines that Hezbollah’s steadfast ability to endure and confront one of the most technologically advanced militaries on the planet highlights its endurance power
David Pratt, Foreign Editor with The Herald on Sunday sums it up pithily opining that by steadfastly championing Palestinian rights and opposing external domination, Hezbollah amplified its influence far beyond Lebanon’s borders. It became a beacon of resistance against the forces of oppression, inspiring solidarity across diverse communities united in the pursuit of justice.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s role as a rallying figure cemented this legacy, while also galvanising a shared vision of dignity and sovereignty in defiance of foreign domination. Through its actions and narrative, Hezbollah solidified its position not just as a regional force but as an emblem of global resistance against colonialism and imperialism, Pratt wrote further.
Perhaps nowhere will the post-ceasefire political landscape be tested more than in the country’s south, much of which are inhabited by Lebanon’s Shia population and therefore Hezbollah heartlands.
—— Asad Mirza is a New Delhi-based senior commentator on national, international, defence and strategic affairs, environmental issues, an interfaith practitioner, and a media consultant.